Elon Musk talks the talk. Many Conservatives still point to the problems at X, but overall progress toward freedom is being made, and Democrats are not happy.
In a monumental shift in the landscape of digital communications, April 2022 witnessed Elon Musk fulfilling his promise to acquire Twitter, now rebranded as X. This acquisition unfolded amidst the tumult of pandemic-related chaos and amid a pervasive mass censorship campaign orchestrated by major tech entities and various government bodies.
Elon Musk successfully getting rid of 80% of Twitter employees was a watershed moment. It proved how much of our highly paid corporate employment base is simply unneeded bloat. That’s true even if you dislike Musk or think he cut too deeply- Aaron M. Renn
During the early months of 2022, expressing opinions on contentious issues such as Covid vaccines, gender ideology, Hunter Biden’s laptop, the war in Ukraine, or the events of January 6th became an arduous task. Any divergence from the established narrative led to severe consequences, with tens of thousands losing their social media accounts for merely presenting factual information. Continued below the vid clip
Elon Musk on X‘s (formerly twitter) stance during the presidential election. Considering Twitters far left background and censorship
Elon Musk on X’s (formerly twitter) stance during the presidential election.
Considering Twitters far left background and censorship pic.twitter.com/2EkTWzzRWV
— Inspire (@dynastycorp99) December 30, 2023
Musk, upon assuming control of Twitter, reinstated numerous suspended accounts, including Alex Jones, and President Trump. His focus, however, was directed at the root cause of the censorship regime: the left-leaning management and the multitude of activist moderators tasked with monitoring and suppressing dissent.
San Francisco Boasted They Would Hire Thousands Of Sacked Twitter Employees – It Didn't Happen https://t.co/PrwRXIpHXW OPERATION PERCEPTION DECEPTION LIVES ON pic.twitter.com/3S4fZXuzJS
— MedicalQuack (@MedicalQuack) December 31, 2023
Unsurprisingly, Musk’s actions drew the ire of journalists and government officials, who threatened investigations into the takeover, even contemplating the complete shutdown of the platform. This unveiled the collusion between the government and Big Tech in violating the First Amendment rights of Americans, puncturing the leftist online echo chamber.
Musk further exposed Twitter’s inefficiencies by terminating over 80% of its staff, over 6000 employees, only for the platform to function seamlessly without them. The woke regime, however, persisted in its posturing.
In November 2022, San Francisco Mayor London Breed attempted to counter Musk’s influence by announcing 4800 vacant positions for the terminated “Tweeps.” While the city government likely believed these activist managers and censors would seamlessly transition into local bureaucracy, the true message was clear: leftists would be shielded from the repercussions of their decisions.
A federal judge ruled that #Twitter violated several contracts by failing to pay millions of dollars in bonuses that the social media company had promised its employees. Now, the company may be in bigger trouble.
Musk promised – but didn't deliver
Mark Schobinger, who
1/7 pic.twitter.com/WcIKgOqO2h— Dancing Queen 🛼🛼🪩🎖️🎄 (@D4nciingQueen) December 27, 2023
Despite Breed’s vocal criticism of Musk’s business decisions, particularly his relocation of Tesla to Texas, her promise of thousands of tech jobs in civic roles turned out to be nothing more than a virtue signal.
Over a year later, only 16 people have been hired for these positions, casting doubt on whether any were former Twitter employees. Critics attribute this slow hiring process to the city’s notorious bureaucracy, with applicants waiting up to 260 days for a response.
San Francisco Boasted They Would Hire Thousands Of Sacked Twitter Employees – It Didn't Happen – https://t.co/MHefFWZvOD Francisco Boasted They Would Hire Thousands Of Sacked Twitter Employees – It Didn't Happen pic.twitter.com/Bb4yWjsIgc
— Entrepreneur, author and publisher. (@michael_0000) December 31, 2023
The city also faced the challenge of competing with the lavish perks offered by Big Tech companies. The allure of smoothie bars, yoga rooms, and minimal work hours proved more enticing than transitioning to government roles, leading to a tepid response from the former Tweeps.
– Whatfinger SponsorMoreover, the potential mismatch of skill sets became evident. Many Twitter employees may have discovered their qualifications were narrowly tailored to the requirements of a social media conglomerate, making them ill-suited for roles beyond the Big Tech sphere.
San Francisco’s attempt to come to the rescue of ousted Twitter executives and censors resulted in a debacle. The city still grapples with unfilled positions, and while some former Tweeps may have found employment elsewhere, Musk’s preemptive staff reduction seems prescient amid the broader trend of job cuts in the web-based corporate landscape.
Major Points Discussed:
- In April 2022, Elon Musk fulfilled his promise to acquire Twitter, now known as X, marking a historic event in digital communications.
- Musk reactivated suspended accounts and targeted the root cause of censorship by addressing the far-left management and activist moderators responsible for suppressing dissent.
- Musk’s actions exposed collusion between the government and Big Tech, revealing violations of Americans’ First Amendment rights and disrupting the leftist online echo chamber.
- Musk’s decision to terminate over 80% of Twitter staff demonstrated the platform’s inefficiencies, functioning seamlessly without the excess workforce.
- San Francisco Mayor London Breed’s promise of 4800 civic roles for terminated Twitter employees turned out to be an empty virtue signal, with only 16 hires over a year later, revealing bureaucratic delays and mismatched skill sets.
Comments – Threads – Links
- No body wants ex’s of Twitter…They got sacked for a reason..and even the “left” find them unworthy now- Entity of Life
- Some companies might want to hire them but they’re all still in their cars yelling at TikTok and won’t leave- Kyle
- Federal judge’s usually rule for the banking cartels, and they cannot stand musk’s free speech platform- Gettysburg Obsessed
- It’s a campaign against X, Musk and in the end, against free speech. When the old Twitter holding got the money, they could have paid their employees 1000 years compensation and did not. The media is an army in a hybrid war, hence they are combatants. They have a greater reach than a tank battalion and are eager to incite the world. When humankind is held stupid like beef cattle, but calling for a beating, the train that already rolls (the war those called), can’t be stopped easily, but probably until the enlightenment. 38.8*C fever, not responsible for that Xeet- xcia
-
If you buy a house, and the former owner of that house owed money to the gardener, do you now owe money to that gardner?- Cam Alan; Just Between UsBREAKING: CENSORSHIP ATTEMPT OF X USERS A California federal judge ruled against Elon Musk’s social media company in a legal battle over disclosing content moderation policies, highlighting the tension between free speech principles and the need to regulate harmful content. The decision reflects broader challenges in balancing free speech with social responsibility on digital platforms. AKA excuses to silence Americans. What you need to know: – Federal Judge Ruling Against Musk’s Company: A federal judge in California ruled against Elon Musk’s social media company in its effort to avoid disclosing content moderation policies. – Judge Shubb’s Decision: US District Court Judge William Shubb denied a preliminary injunction against a California law requiring transparency in content moderation. – Musk’s Free Speech Stance: Musk, who describes himself as a “free speech absolutist,” faces challenges in balancing free speech with moderating provocative content on his platform. – California’s AB 587: The law mandates large social media platforms to disclose their content moderation rules, targeting hate speech, racism, disinformation, and more. – Musk’s Opposition to AB 587: Musk argued that defining hate speech and misinformation is challenging and subjective, claiming that the law could lead to political bias in content moderation. – Musk’s Acquisition and Policy Changes: After acquiring the platform, Musk cut down the content moderation team, leading to criticism over increased hate speech. – Increased Scrutiny and Legal Action: The platform’s content moderation has been under scrutiny, especially after accusations of tolerating antisemitic content. Musk’s company has also sued Media Matters over claims of driving advertisers away. – Musk’s Response to Advertisers: Musk criticized major brands for halting advertising, accusing them of “blackmail” and expressing his frustration openly. – Apology for Endorsing Antisemitic Theory: Musk apologized for endorsing an antisemitic conspiracy theory that contributed to an advertiser exodus. – Jack LombardiWe need to stay strong & be smart. The State of California is currently mandating & fighting Elon Musk for X to comply with un-American, unconstitutional censorship of their communist terms of citizen oppression. There’s nothing kind, caring or liberal about a liberal! – Karen Harris
